Not upheld: scam/fraud - failure to prevent unauthorised payments and failure to recover funds complaint against Bank of Scotland plc trading as Halifax

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained that Halifax failed to prevent him losing £4,230 to an unregulated investment firm 'V' between January 2023 and August 2025, which he believed was a scam. Halifax and the FOS investigator rejected the complaint. The ombudsman upheld the rejection, finding that the payments were not unusual enough to trigger Halifax's fraud detection obligations - they were modest (mostly £200 or under), consistent with Mr M's prior investment activity, and spread over 2.5 years without significant increases. Although Mr M claimed vulnerability, Halifax was unaware of this, and the transaction patterns alone did not require intervention. The ombudsman also found that chargeback recovery was not viable due to reporting delays and the fact that Mr M received the service he paid for.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Halifax has obligations to be alert to fraud and scams, the payments Mr M made were not remarkable enough to trigger concern. The payments were modest (mostly £200 or under), consistent with his prior spending habits, spread over an extended period (over 2.5 years), and did not increase significantly - all factors suggesting they would not have raised suspicion of fraud. Although Mr M claimed vulnerability, Halifax was not made aware of this and the transaction patterns alone did not require intervention. Additionally, chargeback recovery was not viable due to reporting delays and the fact that Mr M received the service he paid for.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website